Lets say I have 2 identical embryos frozen. I implant one and have a son. That son grows up and gets married. They cannot have children. His wife takes my son's frozen twin brother and has it implanted. She then gives birth to her husband's identical twin brother.

Is this ethical? Would hospitals ever allow it?

What?!

No.

No, no, no, no, and no. You are not serious.

How the hell ... under what possible circumstances ... I mean ....

What?

There are grandmothers giving birth (http://www.parentdish.com/2007/10/01/grandmother-gives-birth-to-grandchildren-twins-version/)to their daughter's child. So, how far are we willing to let people give birth?

There are grandmothers giving birth (http://www.parentdish.com/2007/10/01/grandmother-gives-birth-to-grandchildren-twins-version/)to their daughter's child. So, how far are we willing to let people give birth?

Yes, but they were not from the 'grandmother's' eggs. They were from either the daughter or other donor.

Is this ethical? Would hospitals ever allow it?
No. No.

women use donated eggs and sperm. How is this frozen embryo any different?

women use donated eggs and sperm. How is this frozen embryo any different?

Ermm because it is his brother. The child would not be his son, but his brother, born to his wife, and thus, really your biological child.

It would be akin to my removing some eggs, having my husband fertilise them, and then keep them frozen for one of my kids to use when they get married and want to have kids of their own.. Oh wait.. it would be exactly the same. No way that could be classified as ethical.

So, how far are we willing to let people give birth?

So explain to me how that goes.

Really, you've got a best-selling novel right there.

Well, it would be a scary book.

Celine Dion had 3 identical embryos. She had her son and was going to have the rest implanted later. So at 3 yr intervals she would give birth to an identical child. Well, she decided one was enough. But what about the other 2? So then I thought....

Well, it would be a scary book.

Celine Dion had 3 identical embryos. She had her son and was going to have the rest implanted later. So at 3 yr intervals she would give birth to an identical child. Well, she decided one was enough. But what about the other 2? So then I thought....

Um no. An identical child would mean that the child is an identical twin, which usually comes from the one egg.

She may have had three eggs fertilised and is leaving a three year gap between having each child, but they are from three different eggs.

no, she had 1 egg, and it split into identical triplets. Her story, not mine.

but anyways.....

Actually tiassa and bells i have to say i disagree with you here. If its an ebrio rather than an egg fertilised by her son then i cant see an issue. It wouldnt be his brother because it would be raised as the couples child. I dont really see any difference better this and surigocy to be honest as we currently alow sperm and egg donors and we are going to (soon hopefully) alow surigocy so what is the difference between this and any other donor. Actually i have herd lots of stories of sisters being egg donors for eachother (it wouldnt be normal for a mother to do this as you would expect her to be infertile by the time her children were having children)

Lets say I have 2 identical embryos frozen. I implant one and have a son. That son grows up and gets married. They cannot have children. His wife takes my son's frozen twin brother and has it implanted. She then gives birth to her husband's identical twin brother.

Is this ethical? Would hospitals ever allow it?

How the fuck do these indescribably stupid ideas even pop into your head?

Lets say I have 2 identical embryos frozen. I implant one and have a son. That son grows up and gets married. They cannot have children. His wife takes my son's frozen twin brother and has it implanted. She then gives birth to her husband's identical twin brother.

Is this ethical? Would hospitals ever allow it?Sure do it. Is it the DNA that's important or the person?

Actually tiassa and bells i have to say i disagree with you here. If its an ebrio rather than an egg fertilised by her son then i cant see an issue. It wouldnt be his brother because it would be raised as the couples child. I dont really see any difference better this and surigocy to be honest as we currently alow sperm and egg donors and we are going to (soon hopefully) alow surigocy so what is the difference between this and any other donor. Actually i have herd lots of stories of sisters being egg donors for eachother (it wouldnt be normal for a mother to do this as you would expect her to be infertile by the time her children were having children)

A sister being an egg donor for her sibling is not the same as having your parents donate their embryo to their other child and his wife. As in the mother and father donating another twin to one twin for his wife to give birth to it and have it as their (the son's child).

It would be his brother because it is his biological brother that his wife is giving birth to. You don't see the ethical issues in such a scenario? There is a huge difference between this scenario and "any other donor".

What ethical issues do you see here, Bells?
No one has voiced any reasons that it shouldn't be allowed, except along the lines of "Ewwww! Yuck!"

no i dont actually see any difference. Its the relationship not the biology that matters as shown by the amount of grandparents raising there grandchildren and adoptive parents around.

Look at it a different way, a women has two children 20 years apart (unusual but possable) and she is killed just after giving birth to the second child. The first child rasies the second as there own. Whos child is it? is what they are doing unethical?

The frozen embryo would have half the son's genes, and none of the wife's genes, right?
This is the same as a donor egg fertilized by the son's sperm. Or the son's child from a previous relationship.

What's the big problem here... that the man's wife will carry the man's brother? Or that the man will raise his brother?

Yeah, I'm not really seeing anything other than "eww, yuck", either.

What ethical issues do you see here, Bells?
No one has voiced any reasons that it shouldn't be allowed, except along the lines of "Ewwww! Yuck!"

The frozen embryo would have half the son's genes, and none of the wife's genes, right?
This is the same as a donor egg fertilized by the son's sperm. Or the son's child from a previous relationship.

What's the big problem here... that the man's wife will carry the man's brother? Or that the man will raise his brother?
Ah no. The scenario posed by Orleander in the opening post is that the son's wife would be giving birth to his identical twin. And you really don't see anything wrong with that?:bugeye:

This isn't an "ewww! yuck!" reaction. Do you think it would be ethical for someone to give birth to their own biological sibling? Do you think it would be fair on both of them? What are the legal repercussions to this? For starters, how would you explain it to the child... "Well even though I am your daddy because you came out of mummy's tummy, I am really your identical twin"..

The frozen embryo would not have half of the son's genes. If he is an identical twin, he would have the exact same genes as the son, who would then become his father.

Would you be seeing no issues with this if the son was a daughter and she would be giving birth to her own identical twin? Lets imagine the twins are female instead of male. Should a person be allowed to give birth to their own sibling or twin?

Well, no. I don't see anything wrong with that.

What's to explain to the child?
"We have the same genes, son."
"What's that mean, Dad?"
"It means we look the same."
"Yay!"

Why would it be any different with a daughter?

People are allowed to give birth to their own children, for goodness sake... so why not their siblings?

I know this might feel wrong, but can you pinpoint anything actually wrong?

Would the situation feel any different if the frozen embryo was a sibling, but not an identical twin?

Bells to be perfectly honest this is no different to cloning but without the genetic problems with an engerneared clone

I don't know if that's a good riposte, Asguard.
It's not like there are no ethical issues with cloning!

Bells, you're just going off feelings.

Pete most of the ethical issues around cloning have to do with the dangors of genetic defects (like dolly the sheep) and the fact that the child tends to be the age of the orgional DNA rather than the birth age.

If the embro has split already then those cease to be issues.

To be honest i think bells and tiassa are thinking about this like incest rather than just giving a child to there kids (the way a surogate would). The fact that its a clone of the father makes no difference to the fact that he IS the father because he cares for and rasies the child. The same goes for the mother, she is the childs mother because she cares for the child. Where the biology comes from really doesnt matter any more than it matters for sperm and egg donation.

Well, no. I don't see anything wrong with that.

What's to explain to the child?
"We have the same genes, son."
"What's that mean, Dad?"
"It means we look the same."
"Yay!"

Why would it be any different with a daughter?

People are allowed to give birth to their own children, for goodness sake... so why not their siblings?

I know this might feel wrong, but can you pinpoint anything actually wrong?

:bugeye:

If something feels wrong, then doesn't that tell you that it might just be wrong?

Giving birth to one's own child is not the same as giving birth to one's own biological sibling. What's next? Giving birth to a parent's identical twin or sibling?

What could be wrong with this.. Lets see.. If the son has a genetic illness for example? Would the second twin have the same rights over his biological parents' estate is another? What if the child decides he wants to get to know his biological parents or the donors? Since this is obviously one that involves family members, how comfortable would the son feel about his son recognising that his grandparents are his biological parents? Shall I go on? What if the son falls ill and is in need of a kidney transplant for example? Should his son (his identical twin or sibling) feel pressured or obligated to donate a kidney due to the fact that he is his father's brother? And that's just for starters.

Bells, you're just going off feelings.
Maybe I am.

To be honest i think bells and tiassa are thinking about this like incest rather than just giving a child to there kids (the way a surogate would). The fact that its a clone of the father makes no difference to the fact that he IS the father because he cares for and rasies the child. The same goes for the mother, she is the childs mother because she cares for the child. Where the biology comes from really doesnt matter any more than it matters for sperm and egg donation.
Incest? No.

Wrong? Yes. I don't know about Tiassa, but personally, this is highly unethical. Yes, I am not discounting that the father would view the child as his son instead of his twin or sibling. Same goes for the mother. But this can be taken further. What of the mother in this relationship?

Let me give you an example.. Lets imagine the same scenario as the one posted by Orleander with a twist. Lets imagine the son dies and the wife, having missed out on the chance to have a child with him, asks if she can be the mother of her dead husband's frozen twin or sibling embryo? Should she be allowed to? Lets say she missed her husband so she wants to give birth to his twin or sibling? Yes? No?

What's wrong with feelings?

It is tres creepy and fucked up.

(God, that was liberating.)

Bells, are you dictating to women what they can and cannot do with their bodies?

well legally an embrio belongs to the two people who created it (as shown in the recent case of a women trying to use her dead husband's and her frozen embro's after his death) so legally its the sons mother and father who would have to concent. Wether they chose to or not is up to them.

Bells, are you dictating to women what they can and cannot do with their bodies?

No.

well legally an embrio belongs to the two people who created it (as shown in the recent case of a women trying to use her dead husband's and her frozen embro's after his death) so legally its the sons mother and father who would have to concent. Wether they chose to or not is up to them.
So you're telling me there is nothing wrong or, for lack of a better term, fucked up, with letting the widow of one twin carry the frozen embryo of the surviving twin because she misses her husband?

:bugeye:

:bugeye:

If something feels wrong, then doesn't that tell you that it might just be wrong?
Yes, but it's not sufficient on its own. Feelings aren't always reliable.

Giving birth to one's own child is not the same as giving birth to one's own biological sibling. What's next? Giving birth to a parent's identical twin or sibling?
How about giving birth to an unrelated baby?

What could be wrong with this.. Lets see.. If the son has a genetic illness for example?
A known genetic illness? Then it would be a bad idea.

Would the second twin have the same rights over his biological parents' estate is another?
No, just as the child conceived with donor sperm or egg has no claim on the donor's estate.

What if the child decides he wants to get to know his biological parents or the donors?
That's not a problem in this case is it? They won't be hard to find!

Since this is obviously one that involves family members, how comfortable would the son feel about his son recognising that his grandparents are his biological parents?
That sounds like the "yuck" factor again. Why should it be uncomfortable?
If he's not comfortable with it, he wouldn't let it happen.

What if the son falls ill and is in need of a kidney transplant for example? Should his son (his identical twin or sibling) feel pressured or obligated to donate a kidney due to the fact that he is his father's brother?
That's a separate issue (as long as the child isn't being specifically produced to be an organ donor.) Should any compatible donor feel pressured to donate? No, they should not.

I just don't see this case as significantly different to bearing a conceived by donor egg and sperm. There are ethical issues with any form of IVF- but I don't think that this case has any extra. Less, if anything, since the donors are not strangers.

I can hear it now "Wow, he looks just like his father!" But I don't see any issues with it.

I don't. It's fucked up, but hey, so are people.

bells no i dont really see that i have the right to judge it. I personally wouldnt donate sperm for my brother but there are people who would so what?

As long as a child is going into a loving family and wont have physical harm because of it i dont belive anyone should judge

This makes me think of a scenario i recently encountered. My half brother and his partner want a child. She's tried IVF many times to no avail. I offered them my womb to bake their little cookie in. Is that unethical because I'll essentially be having my brother's child. Cool, how redneck.

This is just weird. I think given that the whole scenario is a little strange I don't have a totally considered opinion. I would have though that freezing an embryo and implanting it in your daughter in law would be too outrageous. But it would technically be a relative rather than someone elses kid and you don't know who its parents were.

This makes me think of a scenario i recently encountered. My half brother and his partner want a child. She's tried IVF many times to no avail. I offered them my womb to bake their little cookie in. Is that unethical because I'll essentially be having my brother's child. Cool, how redneck.

It's not the same thing as the scenario given by the OP. You would be carrying your brother's child, through IVF. You would not be carrying and giving birth to your brother (or twin) when your parents gave you the embryo's left over from when they used IVF to have you.